Gardner v. Gardner
Citations
- 177 Pa. 218
- 35 A. 558
- 1896 Pa. LEXIS 967
Syllabus
<p>Wills — Revocation—Cancellation—Evidence.</p> <p>On an issue to determine whether or not a will had been canceled or destroyed by the testator it appeared that the testator made the will fourteen days before his death, and after his death it could not be found. The proponents offered testimony to show the deliberation with which the will was made; that the will was placed in a trunk, the key of which shortly passed out of testator’s possession; that between the interval of the making of his will and testator’s death, testator was physically weak; that he used expressions after the will was made consistent with its provisions and inconsistent with an intention to die intestate, and that he expressed a desire that the scrivener who had drawn the will would come and make changes in or complete it. There was no evidence of any change in the circumstances of any of testator’s relatives after the will was made. The contestants offered the testimony of all of the persons who surrounded the testator from the time the will was made to his death, and who remained in his house after his death, to the effect that they had not seen the will and had not destroyed it. The scrivener kept the schedule from which the will was prepared. Held, that a judgment and verdict for the proponents should be sustained.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “[Circumstantial evidence ... may be sufficient for [the fact-finder] to infer that the testator did not destroy this will.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Dean, Fell, McCollum, Pee, Sterrett, Williams
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
11 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Murray WillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1961-06-02· cited 20×
- Bradway v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1919-06-30· cited 20×
- Ewing v. McIntyreMichigan Supreme Court· 1905-10-02· cited 20×
- In Re Estate of JanoskySuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2003-06-16· cited 17×
- Estate of: I. Wilner Appeal of: Baker, L.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2016-07-19· cited 14×
- Glockner v. GlocknerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1919-01-20· cited 12×
- In Re Estate of KeiserSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1989-05-22· cited 7×
- Re: Estate of Maddi, C.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2017-07-25· cited 5×
- Wilson v. O'Hara TownshipSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1900-07-26· cited 5×
- O'Neill's EstateBucks County Orphans' Court· 1946-09-03· cited 1×
- In re Estate of GodsilCalifornia Superior Court, San Francisco County· 1895-07-01
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.